Professionalization or Movementisation? How Civil Society Organisations Cope with De-Democratization and the Contested Civic Space

Our paper examines how democratic backsliding affects the core resources of civil society organizations (CSOs) and analyzes the resulting strategic adaptations of both loyal and critical organizations. While existing research largely centers on the strategies of independent, critical CSOs in hostile political climates, our study highlights that regime-aligned organizations are also affected, facing growing financial support from the state and increasing demands for legitimacy. Using data from an original survey of Hungarian CSOs we investigate the strategic choices of Hungarian CSOs, focusing on two key responses to a hostile environment: "movementization" (adopting participatory, activist approaches) and professionalization (developing specialized organizational structures). Analyzing the drivers and ideological distinctions influencing these strategic choices our findings reveal that social-liberal organizations, which perceive a "shrinking space," utilize both movementization and professionalization strategies, while conservative-aligned organizations predominantly employ professionalization. Contrary to our assumptions, independent resources, such as membership fees, do not significantly impact strategy choice. Our paper contributes to understanding how civil society organizations in polarized and authoritarian contexts navigate limited civic space and adapt their strategies in response to ideological pressures and political constraints.